Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Wiggum15

Why no rocket artillery ingame (MLRS) ?

Recommended Posts

They are outside the scope of CM. They are used on divisional level to attack enemy forces on large scale. Like Duckman said, they would just cover an entire map in CM. Of course there are also precision guided rockets nowadays, but there is no need for rocket arty just for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLRS type systems are referred to as 'Grid Square Removal Systems' jokingly in the military.  The footprint of a salvo is nearly 1 km across.

 

Now, if everything single map in CMBS (including the Quick Battle maps) was minimum 2 km square in size, maybe a case could be made, but most maps are not that size, making MLRS systems impractical for the map scale.

 

Now for quick battles, imagine the most likely outcome.  You buy a Grad system, your opponent buys a MLRS.  Now you can't use the rocket systems once in contact unless you like fragging your own troops, so they become a turn one or turn two system.  You can rule lawyer that you aren't targeting the setup area, it is just a consequence of such a large system that the setup area falls in the footprint...

 

Now, at the start of the battle, you rocket your opponent, he rockets you.  Then you play with what is left standing.

 

That might be interesting to some people but not others.

 

Another thing is larger rocket systems are brigade and division assets.   CMBS is a company level game for the most part, with some large maps perhaps capable of fielding a battalion but it is very rare for a scenario to have a battalion worth of assets to play.  Typically, most games are few platoons to a few companies in size.  At that scale, MLRS systems are not going to be used in the battle - they would be used on forces before they actually entered the scenario map because only the truly desperate use large rocket systems on forces in contact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLRS type systems are referred to as 'Grid Square Removal Systems' jokingly in the military.  The footprint of a salvo is nearly 1 km across.

 

Now, if everything single map in CMBS (including the Quick Battle maps) was minimum 2 km square in size, maybe a case could be made, but most maps are not that size, making MLRS systems impractical for the map scale.

 

Now for quick battles, imagine the most likely outcome.  You buy a Grad system, your opponent buys a MLRS.  Now you can't use the rocket systems once in contact unless you like fragging your own troops, so they become a turn one or turn two system.  You can rule lawyer that you aren't targeting the setup area, it is just a consequence of such a large system that the setup area falls in the footprint...

 

Now, at the start of the battle, you rocket your opponent, he rockets you.  Then you play with what is left standing.

 

That might be interesting to some people but not others.

 

Another thing is larger rocket systems are brigade and division assets.   CMBS is a company level game for the most part, with some large maps perhaps capable of fielding a battalion but it is very rare for a scenario to have a battalion worth of assets to play.  Typically, most games are few platoons to a few companies in size.  At that scale, MLRS systems are not going to be used in the battle - they would be used on forces before they actually entered the scenario map because only the truly desperate use large rocket systems on forces in contact.

My brave, dying Ukrainian bridge defenders would like to request immediate grid squaring, that would at kill some Russians too. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the area of effect for an MLRS fire mission is 1 grid square (1000 x 1000 meters). It's an operational-level asset (brigades/divisions fighting eachother) rather than tactical (battalions/companies etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATACMS wouldn't be totally out of place, and it's been used in place of CAS on a few occasions.  Don't know if the Russians use their precision rocket/non-SCUDlike SSMs in a similar way though.  

 

GMLRS too, seen those fired a lot, especially before we got Excalibur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya I think a lot of you would really want a refund if you were bombarded by the AI at the start of a turn with MLRS LOL. Its bad enough when they do it with anything in the game as it is. I remember I heard a guy once say it should be called DEAD (DEM ENEMY ALL DECEASED).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of those things that we don't need, but the arguments for not having them get weaker as the technology gets better. CMx2 is getting increasingly capably of modelling more area and time to the point where "it knocks out a 1KMx1KM area off the map doesn't cut it because the maps are capable of being quite large and games quite lengthy.

 

Same goes for a lot of the behind the pointy edge of the spear stuff, like tank commanders remounting subordinate vehicles and more robust resupply and refit actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And anyway, if we had MLRS then the forum would be deluged with "Why no TacNukes??" threads.

 

:)

 

When was the last time you saw a tactical nuke being used? You probably don't know. When was the last time rocket artillery was used? Probably five minutes ago...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLRS probably shouldn't be available in QBs at any size, though. Even if 16sqkm maps are doable, with near-on a brigade of troops on each side, QBs aren't aimed at that level of engagement; you need to use the scenario editor, really. And since the QB availability algorithms don't take map or force size into account, you'd get MLRS showing up where it didn't orter... I suppose having MLRS available might mean a max points QB on a too-small map wouldn't need extending past the two hour limit, since the grid would soon be sparsely populated with Broken troops...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL

 

Minute 1: I have a company.

Minute 2: Enemy Grad/MARS fires.

Minute 3: I have a squad.

 

Me: Let's attack!

Pixeltruppen: F**k you, sir!

 

 

Cheers

 

 

Disclaimer: This post is surplus, as everything has been already said, but I found it just too funny to write.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL

 

Minute 1: I have a company.

Minute 2: Enemy Grad/MARS fires.

Minute 3: I have a squad.

 

Me: Let's attack!

Pixeltruppen: F**k you, sir!

 

 

Cheers

 

 

Disclaimer: This post is surplus, as everything has been already said, but I found it just too funny to write.

And there's no harm in rephrasing an assertion so as many people can understand it as quickly as possible, either :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya I think a lot of you would really want a refund if you were bombarded by the AI at the start of a turn with MLRS LOL. Its bad enough when they do it with anything in the game as it is. I remember I heard a guy once say it should be called DEAD (DEM ENEMY ALL DECEASED).

 

Yeah, look at the way that people griped about the rocket systems in BN etc., although to be fair the main complaint there was about how cheap they were.

 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...